Goodbye Windows XP

[Rigby]

Btw, would I be right in guessing that you earn your living in some way associated with supporting MS Windows?

No.

[baljemmett]

Sorry, I didn't realize XP's UI changed over the years.

The ability to drag the taskbar (and thus, start menu) up to the top (or left or right) of the screen has been around since Windows 98 at the latest, maybe even Windows 95.  Usually it's stumbled across by accident through mis-dragging, or dragging unintentionally when a click was intended.  That's how most people find it, in my limited experience.

Just drag it around; it'll snap to the edges of the screen.

Yes, that's been around since Windows 95 - however, exactly because the ability is often discovered by accident (along with fellow novice-puzzlers the zero-height or far-too-tall taskbar), in Windows XP the taskbar became locked by default.  You have to right-click on it and deselect 'lock the taskbar' before it'll let you resize or move either the taskbar or any toolbars within it.

Doesn't help with applications' menu bars, of course, and I suspect those are what were originally in mind for this little subthread...

[Zero999]

the registry exists for the same reason process-limited memory exists; to make it hard for one application to screw with another.  Lots of viruses spread because each program that ran could get the full memory contents of another program.  That is very hard to do, now.  Its a good thing.  The registry is sort of similar, and if you want you can definitely use .ini files if you are a software author.  Nothing prevents you from using .ini files, XML files, encrypted whatever files, or storing your config in the cloud.  The registry is just a very convenient option, and one app running cannot access another's registry keys without permission, if the software author requests that level of security. 
It's just another little layer of security.

It is the software developer that chooses to store configuration to the registry, so complaints about a lack of textual config files should be directed to them.

The file system has security features which prevent important configuration information from being modified.

The registry is nonsense. A good proportion of it isn't even documented and it wouldn't surprise me if even Microsoft themselves don't even know what certain keys do. To change some system settings, you have to search through a load of random keys. The whole thing is a total mess.

[edavid]

The file system has security features which prevent important configuration information from being modified.

The registry was developed when Windows was using the MSDOS filesystem, which had no security features, and was generally so weak it wasn't even suitable for storing config files.  Instead of fixing that, they developed a whole new specialized filesystem called the registry.  But, then they fixed up the filesystem anyway.  What a waste.

The registry is nonsense. A good proportion of it isn't even documented and it wouldn't surprise me if even Microsoft themselves don't even know what certain keys do. To change some system settings, you have to search through a load of random keys. The whole thing is a total mess.

Agreed, but if Microsoft used config files, they would be a mess too

[Rigby]

Agreed, but if Microsoft used config files, they would be a mess too

true, and it's a heck of a lot more difficult to accidentally delete a vital registry key than it is a text file on disk somewhere.

if it isn't documented somewhere, then you shouldn't be dinking around with it, registry or not.  surely by now there's a resource on the web somewhere of known keys and their use(s), though.  I haven't looked.

[TerraHertz]

Agreed, but if Microsoft used config files, they would be a mess too

true, and it's a heck of a lot more difficult to accidentally delete a vital registry key than it is a text file on disk somewhere.

if it isn't documented somewhere, then you shouldn't be dinking around with it, registry or not.  surely by now there's a resource on the web somewhere of known keys and their use(s), though.  I haven't looked.

My apologies, you seemed so dedicated to MS Windows that I assumed you must have in-depth knowledge, and (somehow) still like Windows enough to defend it.
Anyway, while looking into the 'icon position loss' problem Windows has, the right-click context menus, and a few other MS-WindowsXP  aspects that are buried in the Registry, I kept references.
For anyone interested here are some.

If anyone knows of good sources that aren't listed here, please post them.

---------

MS WinXP registry function
--------------------------

See also CLSID_about

20130501
http://www.easydesksoftware.com/rworks.htm
How the Windows Registry Works

http://www.davescomputertips.com/2011/08/the-windows-registry-explained/
The Windows registry explained

In the registry database - five 'hives'
HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT –  storage for information about registered programs and file associations.
HKEY_CURRENT_USER – storage for settings specific to the current user. If your computer is set up with multiple user accounts this is where the settings for each user are kept.
HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE – storage for settings that apply to all users of the computer.
HKEY_USERS – storage for subkeys which correspond to the HKEY_CURRENT_USER keys for each user account.
HKEY_CURRENT CONFIG – storage for keys generated during boot. This hive is actually created when the computer boots and is not stored on your hard drive.

When saved on HD:

Located in c:windowssystem32config
  SAM – contains the HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINESAM hive.
  SECURITY – contains the HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINESECURITY hive.
  SOFTWARE – contains the HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINESOFTWARE hive.
  SYSTEM – contains all other sub hives of THE HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE hive.

WinXP: Located in c:Documents and Settings<your user name>
Vista, Win7:      c:Users<your user name>
  NTUSER.DAT – contains the HKEY_CURRENT_USER hive.

-----------------------

http://www.herongyang.com/Windows/Registry-Hives-HKCR-HKCU-HKLM-HKU-HKCC-HCPD.html
Registry Hives - HKCR, HKCU, HKLM, HKU, HKCC, and HKPD
Information stored in the Registry is divided into several predefined sections called "hives". A registry hive is a top level registry key predefined by the Windows system to store registry keys for specific objectives.

On my Windows XP system, the Registry has 6 registry hives:
HKCR - Abbreviated from the registry key name HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT. HKCR stores information about registered applications, such as Associations from File Extensions and OLE Object Class IDs tying them to the applications used to handle these items.

HKCU - Abbreviated from the registry key name HKEY_CURRENT_USER. HKCU stores settings that are specific to the currently logged-in user. The HKCU key is a link to the subkey of HKEY_USERS that corresponds to the user; the same information is reflected in both locations.

HKLM - Abbreviated from the registry key name HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE. HKLM stores settings that are general to all users on the computer. On my XP system, HKLM contains five subkeys, HARDWARE, SAM, SECURITY, SOFTWARE and SYSTEM.

HKU - Abbreviated from the registry key name HKEY_USERS. HKU contains subkeys corresponding to the HKEY_CURRENT_USER keys for each user registered on the machine.

HKCC - Abbreviated from the registry key name HKEY_CURRENT_CONFIG. HKCC contains information gathered at runtime; information stored in this key is not permanently stored on the hard disk, but rather regenerated at boot time.

HKPD - Abbreviated from the registry key name HKEY_PERFORMANCE_DATA. HKPD provides runtime information into performance data provided by either the operating system kernel itself or other programs that provide performance data. This key is not displayed in the Registry Editor, but it is visible through the registry functions in the Windows API.

If you run "regedit.exe" on a Windows XP system, you should see 5 visible registry hives

------------------------------

http://rwmj.wordpress.com/2010/02/18/why-the-windows-registry-sucks-technically/
Why the Windows Registry sucks … technically

http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/2007/08/was-the-windows-registry-a-good-idea.html
http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/b3mr2/why_the_windows_registry_sucks_technically/

http://superuser.com/questions/486157/how-to-merge-windows-registry-hives-directly-without-converting-them-to-an-inter

http://blogs.msdn.com/b/oldnewthing/archive/2003/08/08/54618.aspx
  Why is a registry file called a "hive"?
  Because one of the original developers of Windows NT hated bees.  So the developer who was responsible for the registry snuck in as many bee references as he could.  A registry file is called a "hive", and registry data are stored in "cells", which is what honeycombs are made of. [Hmm, I thought it had to do with that fact that the data was structured using B-trees?]


http://zts-zts.blogspot.com.au/2009/08/registry.html
What is the Registry?

--------------------
From DS 20130505
It's funny, I have been working with XP all week, and was thinking how
vastly better it was than 7 or 8. Vista was just another ME. Last time I
spoke to Dave A about 3 years ago I asked him if he knew a good win
hack site and he said GOOD programmers just don't DO windows, except maybe
in Java or a HTML tyoe thingy. Active web pages stuff. He had a pal who
reverse engineered the registry code as a phd thesis, but never did
windows ever again, he was so disgusted.

That's certainly been my experience. I have never met a win programmer
whom I respected. Have you? They still have that "we are a monopoly so
f*ck you" mentality, and think even Apples are toys. You know I rather
admire apple, especially for users as opposed to programmers. At least it
has a rock solid kernel base (BSD Unix) and is quite friendly.

---20130506
re: Dave A, i''d have a look around Dublin Uni CS web site for papers
published around 1999/2000 Snag is, if he had help from MS, which they
will do for Uni Phd people, they will have heavily redacted it, maybe even
made it unfindable. They are sorta "helpful"(I.E. They like to see what
you are doing and hold out chocolate) to research people like that. I can
try to ring him when I get back. But these things do have a way of
disappearing into the mists of time.
====================================

Books on the Windows XP registry.
---------------------------------

== Online ==

http://books.sysadmins.su/oldlib/Windows/Mastering%20Windows%20XP%20Registry%20(2002).pdf
Mastering Windows XP Registry   Peter Hipson, 2002
website:  http://www.jsiinc.com/reghack.htm   gone


http://kokyawmyintoo.blogspot.com.au/2008/08/windows-xp-registry-guide-e-book.html
Microsoft Windows XP Registry Guide - 2003 by Jerry Honeycutt
Review: Jerry Honeycutt's, Windows XP Registry Guide, is an invaluable resource for any XP user. Two registry guides I read for previous Windows operating systems were a total waste of money. This book, however, is worth buying at any price. The Windows XP Registry Guide takes a systematic approach to learning and using registry tools to get the most out or your XP system. Novice users will learn enough to make the book worthwhile by reading just the first section (five chapters), but once you get that far you will want to read it all. Jerry is careful to warn about careless hacking and thoroughly covers backing up and restoring the registry using tools already included in Windows XP and several third party tools. I was surprised to learn how useful Microsoft's Word application is in managing changes made to the registry.
Download Link: (but had to wade through a lot of teasers to find it)
http://hotfile.com/dl/39021413/e04d532/Windows.XP.Registry.Guide.rar.html


Master the Windows XP Registry
http://www.techrepublic.com/downloads/master-the-windows-xp-registry/173370
This book chapter, excerpted from O'Reilly's Windows XP in a Nutshell, 2nd Edition , describes how the Windows Registry works, what's in it, and how to safely add and delete keys and values. It also shows how the Registry is organized and explains the function of many of its most important keys. Learn what you need to know about backing up the Windows Registry as well as exporting and importing Registry data with patches.
Title: Windows XP in a Nutshell, 2nd Edition
ISBN: 0596009003  Published: February 2005
Authors: David A. Karp, Tim O'Reilly, Troy Mott
Chapter: Chapter 8: The Registry


Remove applications from the Open With List in Windows Explorer   Version 1.0 March 22, 2011
http://i.techrepublic.com.com/downloads/Windows/mkaelin_QT_Remove_OpenWithApps.pdf?tag=mantle_skin;content

  --- teases - can't get to real non-exe downloadable file ---
http://isohunt.com/torrent_details/218076093/?tab=summary
Directory: Microsoft.Windows.XP.Registry.Guide.Book-PDF-[oB2Se]
Files:Microsoft.Windows.XP.Registry.Guide.Book-PDF-[oB2Se].nfo   2.2 KB
MSWXPRGB[oB2Se].rar   5.7 MB
MSWXPRGB[oB2Se].sfv   223 Bytes
5.72 MB in 3 files. Torrent created 155.3 weeks ago.

http://isohunt.com/torrent_details/41539940/Microsoft+Windows+XP+Registry?tab=summary
File: Ultimate Guide to Microsoft Windows XP Registry 2008 Complete.pdf.zip
5.78 MB in 1 file. Torrent created 262.5 weeks ago.

== Paper ==== 20130510 ====
Microsoft Windows XP Registry Guide
Jerry Honeycutt (Author)
 
Windows XP in a Nutshell. O'Reilly - Chap 8 on registry

Mastering Windows XP Registry
Peter D. Hipson

Managing the Windows 2000 registry. Paul Robichaux. Pub: O'Reilly

==================================
My opinion:
Microsoft: "Let's put all categories of configuration and state information for everything in the Windows OS, GUI and user applications, all mixed together in one giant central database. But with most of it undocumented. Oh, and we'll break it into arbitrary parts, give them ridiculous names, keep the only current version in memory, make sure there's no easy way to save and restore it as a simple, single compact file, and provide a really crap utility to search/edit/debug it. We'll make the data structures it contains arcane and poorly documented, all the better to hide things (like our deliberate 'look and feel' UI cripples - icon position data, cough.) By obfuscation we'll ensure it always grows ever larger and cruftier over time. Essential linkages will be inscrutible numeric CLSIDs, rather than containing any human-comprehensible descriptive text. The mixing of OS and user-app config data will make your working environment of installed software tools totally uncloneable, thus forcing you to frequently waste hours and days rebuilding it all. The operating system and most applications will critically depend on it, which will make it a central point of failure able to take down a whole machine via the slightest corruption. If that should by unlikely chance ever happen, bwahahaha! Not that we insist you regularly buy a new PC and OS or anything!
 We'll call it The Windows Registry."

I'm very interested to see what happens with XP once MS really drops support. There's been an ongoing effort among some groups to reverse engineer XP, de-cruft and open-source it. Tools like nlite are already very useful, and there are some damned good XP-lite install images around. It seems to me there's some potential for a significant freeware fork of the 'Windows' style OS, away from Microsoft's very questionable intended evolution path for Windows. MS sees Windows becoming an ever more closed-box system, with stronger DRM controls, less user visibility of the underlying structures, the raw file system becoming more and more inaccessible, and of course the GUI being even more interwoven with the core OS than it is now. Instead of being a completely independent and replaceable user-level application, as it should be.

[Skimask]

Not even Acronis needed. The basic Windows backup/restore software works sufficiently well. I'm not saying it is the best, just that it works. I always take a full system backup of a new machine after updating it to the latest maintenance and removing the new machine bloatware and trial products I don't want. It makes going back to a clean slate so much less painful and also useful when selling a machine at upgrade time. You leave no personal info laying around. Not in the registry not anywhere.

'tis true.  Acronis works for me, hasn't let me down yet (...yet being the operative word...).  Same as everything else, might be the absolute worst thing for others.
Whenever I set up a new office, I tell the HMFIC of the office that we can either buy a business copy of Acronis now, or he can pay me the extra $$$ later plus the extra hours reloading everything when (not IF, but when) a PC dies a horrible death in some unimaginable way.  When I go back for yearly (monthly in a couple high $$$ clients) preventative maintenance runs, I cut new images.  Saves me a buttload of time when things go south.

[TheBorg]

I realized a couple months ago, when installing a VM, that XP really sucks. No SATA drivers installed, etc, etc. Plus the icons are rubbish compared to anything modern.

Not to say I will not keep a VM on ice just in case I need to use XP, but I'm not sad to see it go. It had it's turn at being a great OS. Now moving on.

[Rigby]

Yeah.  XP is awesome only if you've not used anything newer.

[c4757p]

I realized a couple months ago, when installing a VM, that XP really sucks. No SATA drivers installed, etc, etc. Plus the icons are rubbish compared to anything modern.

XP is a bit sucky, but dude, you just said it sucks because 1) it lacks drivers for one particular interface that was standardized two years after it came out (and for which drivers can be installed somewhat easily), and 2) icons. Surely you've got better....

[edavid]

I realized a couple months ago, when installing a VM, that XP really sucks. No SATA drivers installed, etc, etc. Plus the icons are rubbish compared to anything modern.

XP is a bit sucky, but dude, you just said it sucks because 1) it lacks drivers for one particular interface that was standardized two years after it came out (and for which drivers can be installed somewhat easily), and 2) icons. Surely you've got better....

And those drivers aren't even needed!  Who ever sees any performance benefit from AHCI?

[TMM]

in my opinion, windows 8 was made to detract users from going into its innards. it definately is made to reduce software piracy.

I don't know if it is as effective at doing that as they intended. Downloading and running an executable is as easy as it ever was. Anyone who is willing to install software cracks etc is going to work out how to get into the registry and open the program files folder...

Also the whole 'app store' thing opens up a pandoras box imo. For example, when i got my windows 8 tablet i went and had a look if there was a Facebook app because browsing facebook in internet explorer at 1920x1080 on a 12" display is annoying as you constantly have to zoom in and out. Doing a search for Facebook in the app store returned at least 20 apps that masqueraded as the official facebook app. Any average joe could have easily been tricked into downloading one of those apps and potentially had their private data skimmed off to a third party.

[TMM]

in my opinion, windows 8 was made to detract users from going into its innards. it definately is made to reduce software piracy.

I don't know if it is as effective at doing that as they intended. Downloading and running an executable is as easy as it ever was. Anyone who is willing to install software cracks etc is going to work out how to get into the registry and open the program files folder...

Also the whole 'app store' thing opens up a pandoras box imo. For example, when i got my windows 8 tablet i went and had a look if there was a Facebook app because browsing facebook in internet explorer at 1920x1080 on a 12" display is annoying as you constantly have to zoom in and out. Doing a search for Facebook in the app store returned at least 20 apps that masqueraded as the official facebook app. Any average joe could have easily been tricked into downloading one of those apps and potentially had their private data skimmed off to a third party.

Is your private data in the hands of Facebook any more appealing?

Valid point . The point i was getting at is that it shouldn't be marketed that you need "the app" to access everything. Microsoft don't seem to care about regulating dangerous apps in their app store - it's just another outlet to promote their own products. You could do some serious damage with a third party ebay app or similar and skim money through paypal.

[Rigby]

But the apps themselves don't capture the passwords.  They present authentication form(s) from the site you want to connect to, where you allow or disallow the app to connect.  The app never sees your username or password.

I'm sure there are apps that work differently but I simply don't give my credentials to those apps, and I uninstall them.

The windows store approval process does indeed involve making note of each and every function call made and looks for sneaky stuff like this.  that's why it can take up to a week to get your update into the Windows Store, and that's why a human has to look at each and every submission to the store.

It is far easier to sneak "evil" code into a traditional windows desktop apps, which people seem to trust implicitly, and traditional windows desktop apps are freely downloadable from anywhere.  As someone who has developed for the windows store, it's precisely the windows store auditing that makes me think it is this auditing and scrutiny that is getting people to complain about the windows store.  if I wrote software that spied on people, I'd bitch about the windows store, too, because the windows store makes it much more difficult to get that code to the end user.

It's android that people need to be worried about, really.  Anything can get in there.

[TMM]

But the apps themselves don't capture the passwords.  They present authentication form(s) from the site you want to connect to, where you allow or disallow the app to connect.  The app never sees your username or password.

I'm sure there are apps that work differently but I simply don't give my credentials to those apps, and I uninstall them.

That is the problem. The average user isn't able to judge if it's working in a safe manner. Better off just restricting them to a browser.

[TheBorg]

I realized a couple months ago, when installing a VM, that XP really sucks. No SATA drivers installed, etc, etc. Plus the icons are rubbish compared to anything modern.

XP is a bit sucky, but dude, you just said it sucks because 1) it lacks drivers for one particular interface that was standardized two years after it came out (and for which drivers can be installed somewhat easily), and 2) icons. Surely you've got better....

Better: the fact that I can get a newer version with more drivers and less sucky icons. Interface, maybe not. 
Time to let go. Staying on XP is like saying I'm still running OSX 10.0 ("Cheetah"), or linux 2.5.
Sure, XP will continue to be used in some installations and for particular uses, but for a "consumer", it really is time to move on. 

It really was a decent OS in it's time. But it's time should have ended 5 years ago. Now I won't say I like 8.1, I've never run it, but windows 7 is a pretty darn good OS.

[GreyWoolfe]

To paraphrase Shakespeare, ".Alas, poor XP! I knew him, Horatio, an OS of infinite jest, of most excellent fancy. He hath bore me on his back a thousand times, and now how abhorr'd in my imagination it is!  My gorge rises at it." (holding a large stack of XP install discs glued together and ground to the shape of a skull)

[440roadrunner]

Dislike 7,    Detest 8.      I  use  Linux  for all that  I can.   Started  with   Suse  years  ago, used  Ubuntu  for several years.  Would still be using  Ubuntu  except for  the VERY  annoying  "Unity"  desktop which is  anything  but  --unifying, that is.  and now use  Linux  Mint.

It  just   quite  simply  works   fine.   I use  Winhozed  very  very  little.   Programming  the   Holley EFI  system   is one of the few  jobs  for  Winhozed.

[Rigby]

Seems like you could use any window manager you liked, right?  Used to be that you could configure the living hell out of Linux and that's why people used it.

Are you saying that you actually have to switch distros now to get the UI you want?  Confirmed: Linux sucks.

WAY back in the day, I ran RedHat Linux 4.2 (this is circa 1997 if I recall) with WindowMaker.  the default window manager was not WindowMaker.  It was a huge PITA to set up and I got almost nothing done while fighting the audio subsystem or V4L drivers or whatever the battle du jour was, but when it worked it worked right up until I rebooted.

I was a young lad then and I had the energy to put up with that BS... I don't anymore.  You guys have fun with your OS. 

[SeanB]

That is fine, I still have Win98SE running on a machine. Even has IE installed, but as it is not ever going to get internet access, and runs only 1 vertical app it will be fine until the hardware dies, and in that case I have a mirrored disk, and a spare machine as well. No activation hell, no updates to install, and it still just works.

[Rigby]

That is fine, I still have Win98SE running on a machine. Even has IE installed, but as it is not ever going to get internet access, and runs only 1 vertical app it will be fine until the hardware dies, and in that case I have a mirrored disk, and a spare machine as well. No activation hell, no updates to install, and it still just works.

Of course it still works, it's not doing anything.  This isn't a good testament for the OS.  I was a beta tester for Windows 98 and it was absolute crap through its entire lifetime, for my day-to-day usage.  I've not had a single crash in Windows 7 or 8 that wasn't caused by bad hardware.  Removing said hardware ended any instability.  Win98 would just fall over sometimes, no matter what I was (or wasn't) doing.  Win98 was a mess.  I'm sure, though, if I only used it for one app and didn't connect it to the Internet that it would have been fine, too.

not meaning to nitpick, sorry. 

[SeanB]

Funny enough I used to have 2 home computers, both running Win98SE. One was connected to the internet, and the other was not. Both had the same updates applied, the second via sneakernet. Internet one would run for about a month between reboots, mostly for updates that needed that, and the second would simply have the updates stacked for when I decided to install. Ran Mozilla browser on that then upgraded to Firefox after the name change. When I changed it was to RH6, then Ubuntu, and only the LTS versions. that way things stay stable, not bleeding edge but stable and workable.

[SeanB]

Since 1998............ Firefox was a fork from around 2003.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mozilla

[TVman]

Everyone is NOT thinking 4th dimension.

All those hackers know that people will switch to A windows 7/8 operating system,
But there will few whom will stay.

So the hackers will spit at the newer systems. Right?
Microsoft is trying to get people to BUY a new CPU so they can cash some money!!

It's how they make money......




 

[David_AVD]

on the developer/programmer side, how much license fees do they pay to MS to officially release their works on MS platform?

I program with Delphi (7 and XE) and apart from licensing the development software, there are no fees to pay to anyone.